Tag: 2015

  • Alison McGovern – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Alison McGovern – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Alison McGovern on 2015-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what processes his Department has agreed to enable housing associations to be informed when tenants migrate to universal credit.

    Mr Mark Harper

    The Social Security (Information-sharing in relation to Welfare Services etc.) (Amendment) Regulations 2015 came into force on 13 February 2015 and enable the Department to inform social landlords whenever one of their tenants makes a claim for, or receives an award of, Universal Credit (UC) with housing costs, for the purposes of enabling social landlords to assess which UC claimants may need advice, support or assistance in relation to managing their financial affairs.

    The Department will write to social landlords when a tenant makes a claim for UC, or when a UC claimant becomes a tenant of theirs and the Department has confirmed the tenancy details. The letter will identify the tenant and confirm the date that UC has been claimed from. The information sharing with social landlords through these regulations is aimed at maximising relevant support for vulnerable UC claimants, including enabling social landlords to request Alternative Payment Arrangements (APA) for vulnerable claimants if needed. The Department’s proposals for sharing information with social landlords were published for public consultation last year. Apart from the public consultation, we have also been working closely with local authorities and representatives from the housing organisations in developing our plans for delivering this data sharing.

    This data sharing is being implemented on a test and learn basis, and initially being introduced from 16 February 2015 in areas where UC has been rolled out nationally for single people.

  • Jim Murphy – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Jim Murphy – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jim Murphy on 2015-02-10.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many DWP sanctions there were relating to each benefit in each Scottish parliamentary constituency in 2010-11.

    Esther McVey

    The information requested for Jobseeker’s Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance adverse sanctions, by Scottish Parliamentary constituency, for each of the last four years is published at:

    https://stat-xplore.dwp.gov.uk/

    Guidance on how to extract the information required can be found at:

    https://sw.stat-xplore.dwp.gov.uk/webapi/online-help/Stat-Xplore_User_Guide.htm

    The available information in respect of Income Support Lone Parents (ISLP) sanctions is shown in the attached table.

    “

  • Roger Godsiff – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    Roger Godsiff – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Communities and Local Government

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the Answer of 2 February 2015 to Question 222916, what the total cost to Birmingham City Council will be of funding the Independent Improvement Panel.

    Kris Hopkins

    As indicated in the Panel’s Terms of Reference agreed with the City Council, it will be supported by a secretariat provided jointly by Birmingham City Council and the Department for Communities and Local Government, and the expenses it incurs will be shared equally by the City Council and the Department.

  • Hywel Williams – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Hywel Williams – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Hywel Williams on 2015-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many recipients of war disablement pensions there are in (a) England, (b) Wales, (c) Scotland and (d) Northern Ireland.

    Anna Soubry

    The number of recipients of war disablement pensions in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, can be found below:

    Country

    Number

    England

    89,450

    Wales

    6,925

    Scotland

    11,890

    Northern Ireland

    3,680

    Other UK

    340

    UK Unknown

    345

    Not Known

    135

    Total

    112,765

    Notes:

    1. Other UK includes Isle of Man and Channel Islands.

    2. In line with Defence Statistics’ Rounding Policy, all figures of five or more have been rounded to the nearest 5. Due to rounding, the figures provided may not sum to totals.

  • Simon Kirby – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Simon Kirby – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Simon Kirby on 2015-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps she is taking to enforce humane standards in slaughterhouses; and if she will make a statement.

    George Eustice

    We have in place legislation which sets down strict animal welfare rules within our slaughterhouses. Enforcement of this legislation is the responsibility of the Food Standards Agency; enforcement is carried out by Official Veterinarians in every approved slaughterhouse. We are continuing to work closely with the Food Standards Agency to see how we can further improve the welfare standards in slaughterhouses.

  • Helen Jones – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Helen Jones – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Jones on 2015-02-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the report Research spend in the UK, published by the Stroke Association on 3 December 2014, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the findings of that report; and if he will make a statement.

    George Freeman

    The report published by the Stroke Association compares research spend in four disease areas (stroke, cancer, coronary heart disease and dementia) by governmental organisations and charities.

    The usual practice of the two main public funders of health research – the Department’s National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and the Medical Research Council (MRC) – is not to ring-fence funds for expenditure on particular topics or disease areas: research proposals in all areas compete for the funding available.

    NIHR expenditure on research on stroke, cancer, cardiovascular disease (CVD) (including coronary heart disease) and dementia is shown in the following table.

    £ million

    2009/10

    2010/11

    2011/12

    2012/13

    2013/14

    Stroke

    20.2

    20.9

    20.4

    26.1

    26.3

    Cancer

    101.5

    100.9

    104.1

    133.2

    129.9

    CVD

    31.6

    31.0

    34.1

    42.7

    46.3

    Dementia

    12.6

    18.3

    24.9

    24.4

    26.8

    Through its training and career development programmes, the NIHR supports clinicians at all stages of their career: integrated clinical and academic training; doctoral training; postdoctoral training; and more senior awards. The prestigious NIHR Senior Investigator award provides an additional incentive for the country’s most outstanding clinical researchers. These programmes make a major contribution to the building and developing of research capacity in stroke and other disease areas.

  • Roger Godsiff – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Roger Godsiff – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-02-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the oral evidence to the Health Committee of Dame Fiona Caldicott, 21 January 2015 to Question 705, what assessment he has made of whether patients who opt out of the care.data scheme will be excluded from NHS services such as bowel screening and e-referrals.

    Dr Daniel Poulter

    The process for objecting (‘opting out’) will be communicated during the care.data pathfinder stage and will apply to the use of identifiable general practitioner data for purposes beyond direct care. The care.data Programme team is working closely with clinical commissioning group pathfinder practices to ensure that it is understood that the opt-out should not impact upon the sharing of information for direct care.

    The care.data Programme team is working closely with the Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC), NHS England and the Department in relation to ‘type 2 objections’. Appropriate communications will be agreed before starting communication activity in pathfinder areas.

    For those people who have made an existing ‘type 2 objection’, the HSCIC is committed to ensuring no patient suffers any adverse impact on their direct care through an inappropriate implementation of an objection. This means that information flows to support services such as cancer screening, electronic prescriptions and e-referrals are currently flowing and will continue to do so.

  • Ian Austin – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Ian Austin – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Austin on 2015-02-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to Freedom to speak up?, the report by Sir Robert Francis QC, published on 11 February 2015, when he plans to take steps to ensure that NHS whistleblowers are not discriminated against when they apply for other jobs.

    Dr Daniel Poulter

    On 11 February, my Rt. hon. Friend the Secretary of State accepted in principle all the recommendations made by Sir Robert Francis following his Freedom to Speak Up review. We will shortly be consulting on how best to implement these recommendations. In addition we plan to bring forward measures to provide legislative protection for whistleblowers applying for a job in the National Health Service. With Opposition support, this could be in place before Parliament is prorogued.

    The implementation of Sir Roberts’ recommendations will see a programme of action to help foster an open and learning culture in the NHS backed by local freedom to speak up guardians and a new national whistleblowing guardian. Individual trusts may wish to begin implementing some of these recommendations right away. Local action and responsibility will be at the heart of bringing about a culture where reporting of concerns is valued and encouraged.

  • Rosie Cooper – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Rosie Cooper – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Rosie Cooper on 2015-02-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 9 April 2014, Official Report, columns 261-3W, on psoriasis, what development to Read codes was found to be necessary by the Health and Social Care Information Centre to support the indicators proposed for psoriasis.

    Norman Lamb

    The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Clinical Commissioning Group Outcome Indicator Set (CCG OIS) Advisory Committee considered the following draft psoriasis indicators, derived from the NICE Psoriasis Quality Standard, at its meeting in October 2014:

    – PSO 5.1 Psoriasis: assessment for psoriatic arthritis;

    – PSO 6.2 Skin disease: time off school or work due to skin disease;

    – PSO 6.3 Psoriasis: skin clearance; and

    – PSO 3.2 Psoriasis: Patient experience: access to secondary care services.

    It was the decision of the committee that the indicators did not meet the prioritisation criteria, as set out in the NICE Indicator Process guide. The primary reason for this was that the majority of care for people with psoriasis is provided in primary care and the CCG OIS is focused on care provided in secondary care. As such, the committee has not put forward any of the psoriasis indicators for further development and testing by the Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC). The HSCIC has not, therefore, undertaken any further work on the development of Read Codes for this topic.

    The NICE indicator process guide and the NICE consultation document setting out those indicators which did meet the prioritisation criteria can be found at the links below:

    www.nice.org.uk/media/03E/31/Indicators_process_guide.pdf

    www.nice.org.uk/media/default/Standards-and-indicators/CCGOIS-indicator-consultation.pdf

    “

  • Roger Godsiff – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Roger Godsiff – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2015-02-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, for what reasons the cost of a gun licence has been set at £50 since 2001; and what the net cost to the public purse of the gun licensing system was, including the cost of background checks, in the most recent year for which figures are available.

    Lynne Featherstone

    This Government has been clear that the fact firearms licences did not rise in cost from 2001 is unsustainable. That is why we consulted on a series of price increases to enable the police to recover a greater proportion of the costs, without causing undue financial repercussions for licence owners. The Government ran a consultation on a proposed fee increase for firearms licences between 27 November and 29 December 2014. We are currently considering the responses.

    The former Association of Chief Police Officers previously assessed the cost of gun licences. They estimated that the cost to the taxpayer was £17.2 million in the year 2009-10. Under the Government’s proposed fee levels, in conjunction with the introduction of a new e-commerce tool for policing, the aim is that there will be no net cost to the public purse.